-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/101593/#review3853
-----------------------------------------------------------



kdecore/date/ktimezone.cpp
<http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/101593/#comment3132>

    I received a crash based on this assert when testing with Kontact. I take 
it the refCount is 2 now. ;)
    
    After commenting out the assert everything starts and appears to work 
normally in my limited testing.


- Michael


On June 12, 2011, 12:19 p.m., Volker Krause wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/101593/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated June 12, 2011, 12:19 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for kdelibs, John Layt and David Jarvie.
> 
> 
> Summary
> -------
> 
> This patch makes KTimeZoneBackend use a shared empty private class, an 
> optimization done in a few other places around KDateTime already.
> 
> This specific place turned up during memory-profiling KMail with folders 
> containing ~100k messages. KMail (via KMime) creates one KDateTime object per 
> message (using OffsetFromUTC mode), each of which contains two (empty) 
> KTimeZone objects. The resulting 200k (identical) KTimeZoneBackend objects 
> use about 20Mb of heap memory according to massif.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   kdecore/date/ktimezone.cpp f38deed 
> 
> Diff: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/101593/diff
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> kdecore unit tests still pass, KMail also still works fine, but I have no 
> idea if this has side-effects on other, more complex use-cases
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Volker
> 
>

Reply via email to